Nationalisation of energy generation

Discussion in 'Renewable Energy' started by Goweresque, Feb 13, 2018.

  1. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    Has anyone considered what implications Labour's policy of nationalisation of energy generation might have for the owners of renewable energy plants? One assumes that there would be a cut off point below which private ownership was still allowed, but that is by no means guaranteed.......:unsure::unsure:

    There could also be implications for landowners who receive rents for solar panels and wind turbines - if the assets were nationalised its possible the terms of the leases could be up for changes as well........
     
  2. HAM135

    HAM135 Member

    Surely can only be nationalised if it is a shareholder owned company,don't think it would affect privately owned renewable projects,if labour come to power this could be the least of our problems.
     
    Exfarmer likes this.
  3. Exfarmer

    Exfarmer Member

    Location:
    Bury St Edmunds
    Something for me to look forward too, if they were run like Nationalised companies in the past I will soon be employing several people and get a mega state subsidy, wont need to get out of bed in the morning
     
    thesilentone likes this.
  4. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    Why would nationalisation be limited to assets owned only by limited companies? It makes no difference if a shareholder has his shares taken away or the sole owner has his asset removed directly.

    And anyway I expect most of the larger projects would be inside a limited company anyway as who would run such a large investment on sole ownership?
     
    Bloders likes this.
  5. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    You wouldn't be involved, the asset would be taken off you, if you were the owner. They wouldn't install the former owner as manager, it would be run by some State bureaucracy.
     
    Bloders likes this.
  6. HAM135

    HAM135 Member

    So your thinking is that the goverment could just take over profitable businesses just because they want to...yeah right!!!!!Many large renewables projects are owned by pension companies etc...don't see that happening somehow.
    The only way they can nationalise the energy sector is buy out all the businesses running it,do you have any idea what that will cost?
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  7. Clive

    Clive Staff Member

    Location:
    Lichfield
    why worry about the policy of party that are not in power ? they have no more ability to change law than you or I


    by the next election their "popular" leader will be a old man and despite claims of a successful last election they were miles away from a majority
     
    Courier likes this.
  8. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    The State can do what it likes, Parliament is sovereign. If it passes a law that says all owners of energy producing assets have to pass ownership to the State in return for government bonds, then that is what will happen, the courts allowing. Its how the owners of railways, steel mills, coal mines, ship yards and docks were treated in the 1940s. Just because its in the history books doesn't mean it can't happen again.

    John McDonnell has already announced that it would 'cost nothing' because they would pay in freshly minted government bonds, not cash. So as far as they are concerned, money isn't an issue.
     
    Bloders likes this.
  9. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    Labour don't have to get a majority on their own at the next election, a score draw will do them, because the SNP will back them to the hilt. The SNP is more Left wing than Labour, a nice bit of nationalisation will be right up their street. They'd vote for it in an instant.
     
    Bloders likes this.
  10. Exfarmer

    Exfarmer Member

    Location:
    Bury St Edmunds
    This of course is exactly the reason why JC and his fellow adventurers were so keen on dumping the EU.
    One of the primary features of the development of the European Union was the prevention of the state depriving private people of property without compensation.
    One of the main featuresof the liberation of the former Eastern bloc from communist rule was the compensation of former owners.
    With our parliament paramount , it can deprive any property owner of their assets by compulsory purchase, with little or no financial or other redress.
    We welcome JC at our peril.
     
    Bloders likes this.
  11. Goweresque

    Goweresque Member

    Location:
    North Wilts
    Exactly, which is why Labour won't ultimately stymie Brexit, they need to be out of the EU to implement their policies without the courts stopping them.
     
  12. warksfarmer

    warksfarmer Member

    Yep righto ...... he’ll be nationalising food production as well at the same time then.
     
  13. Exfarmer

    Exfarmer Member

    Location:
    Bury St Edmunds
    Um sorry ,am I missing something, we are leaving the EU so JC would have a free hand when he gets in.
    But of course will he be PM , or will momentum ensure John Mcdonell assumes the mantel. Then the heads will roll!
     
  14. Y Fan Wen

    Y Fan Wen Member

    Location:
    N W Snowdonia
    I've just been pondering land nationalisation. Would we all be tenants then? Would rents be set for maximising income or would we all be like NT tenants, when we all have to follow green policies?
    Could it be that the era of the collective farm will come again?
    Do we sell our output to private companies and supermarkets or will they all be nationalised as well, farm to fork?
    Lots to think about!
     
  15. Pilgrimmick

    Pilgrimmick Member

    Location:
    Argyll
    What acreage does the state decide is worth taking over, 10-1000, Not sure we are ready as a nation for that sort of nationalisation. Even communist Russia has moved away from it.
     
  16. Pond digger

    Pond digger Member

    Location:
    East Yorkshire
    I suspect Labour would only be interested in the mega generators: nationalising all those rooftop solar panels is hardly going to be a vote winner.
     
  17. Exfarmer

    Exfarmer Member

    Location:
    Bury St Edmunds
    Although I am a rooftop generator, most of the rooftop panels you see in 4kw blocks are I guess , owned by large investors renting rooffs giving free electricity to the occupier. They often generate little benefit to home owner but the investor is gaining big fit payments from a multitude of these systems.
    Of course many of these investors will be your and mine pension funds but that will not stop them being nationalised if the labour government decide to grab them.
     
  18. Pond digger

    Pond digger Member

    Location:
    East Yorkshire
    They wouldn’t want the responsibility that would come with nationalisation: I doubt government could make sums add up.
     
  19. Exfarmer

    Exfarmer Member

    Location:
    Bury St Edmunds
    If you confiscate it with the sole intention of cutting the FIT payments to fat. Cats there will be thousands of voters in favour, after all, isn’t the daily wail regularly running stories how renewables are killing the world and making electricity so dear?
    They wont notice how. It hits their pensions for donkey’s years, just as when Gordon Brown did similar.
    As for maintaining them I suspect it will be like all those little wind turbines dotted about that have not produced a watt in the past 5 years or more. The margins are so low the investors just write them off hoping the propeety owners will get so exasperated they will buy them on the outrageous terms in the contract.
     
  20. smallholder99

    smallholder99 Member

    as opposed to nationalisation ,a lot of farms are already under the control of banks and they prob earn more out of the farmer than if they ran the farms themselves
     

Share This Page